Is the .40 S&W going to be an orphan?

My Buddy works for a local PD and they just dumped ( or are in the process ) the Glock 22 for the Glock 17
What a PD makes their experts carry has no impact on my decision making process. They need to have men with butter smooth hands and women who can't fill their hats qualify.
 
the more shooting I do, the more I have come to actually like .40S&W. I find it pleasant and a nice cartridge. of course I still prefer 9mm and 45acp, but I wouldn't hesitate to add another .40S&W chambered firearm.

where 9's and .45's can be fired from just about anything, my experience w .40S&W is that it's way more fun from a full size handgun. shooting a USP 40 or a P229 in .40 is quite nice. however I'm not a big fan of a G27 or G23 for realling firing a bunch of rounds and heavy practice. whole different animal.

anyway i meet many people who have shot Glock's in .40's or maybe a S&W shield in .40 so they conclude .40S&W is no good....it's an unfair assessment. shoot it from a full size gun that was built for the cartridge and it's acually great.
 
My 9mm, +p+, 1275 fps, jhp, bonded ammo, in pre ban, high cap mags, tops your .40.
My .45acp, 850 fps, bonded ammo, in pre ban, high cap mags, tops your 40.
I sold my Glock 22, Glock 23 AND Glock 23c, when my local PD switched from Glock 22's to Glock 21's because when they shot folks with Glock 22's, they didn't fall down and stay down. Seems that many PD's with nines and fourty fives don't have that problem, according to Ayoob.
 
LE pundits are figuring out that with modern high performance ammo, there isn't really a difference in stopping power between 9x19 and fotay, and it is once again becoming "cool" to carry a nine.

So the .40 hasn't benefited from the last 20 years of high performance ammo development too?... [hmmm]
 
My 9mm, +p+, 1275 fps, jhp, bonded ammo, in pre ban, high cap mags, tops your .40.
My .45acp, 850 fps, bonded ammo, in pre ban, high cap mags, tops your 40.
I sold my Glock 22, Glock 23 AND Glock 23c, when my local PD switched from Glock 22's to Glock 21's because when they shot folks with Glock 22's, they didn't fall down and stay down. Seems that many PD's with nines and fourty fives don't have that problem, according to Ayoob.

Ayoob believed this when the round first came out. Called it the 40 short and weak... he has since said:

"In .40 caliber, the original 180-grain hollow point at subsonic velocity has worked better than expected, but the star performers in .40 ammo tend to be high tech bullets such as the Winchester SXT or Ranger T, the CCI Gold Dot, and the Remington Golden Saber with 155-grain bullets at 1200 foot-seconds or 165-grain bullets at 1140 to 1150 feet per second. Using the 165-grain Ranger in their .40 caliber Glocks, the Nashville, Tennessee, Police have amassed a long series of impressive one-shot stops."
 
Ayoob believed this when the round first came out. Called it the 40 short and weak... he has since said:

"In .40 caliber, the original 180-grain hollow point at subsonic velocity has worked better than expected, but the star performers in .40 ammo tend to be high tech bullets such as the Winchester SXT or Ranger T, the CCI Gold Dot, and the Remington Golden Saber with 155-grain bullets at 1200 foot-seconds or 165-grain bullets at 1140 to 1150 feet per second. Using the 165-grain Ranger in their .40 caliber Glocks, the Nashville, Tennessee, Police have amassed a long series of impressive one-shot stops."

LOL. He said the same thing about the 9mm and .45acp, Winchester Ranger ammo that I referred to in this thread, but with the 9mm, you get more capacity as a bonus. My own experience with the .45acp provides me with the confidence required to carry it with confidence. You can PM me with your experiences if you like and I'll share mine with you.

My source of information is Massad Ayoob's own annual publication. The Complete Book Of Handguns.
 
Last edited:
I don't really care what anyone else likes to shoot. Just don't BS the thread with stopping power crap and arguing against prices that can easily be looked up.

P.S. I think I have larger-than-average hands - sometimes I wish for a larger Glock grip. Is that weird?

- - - Updated - - -


[laugh] Okay, fine - 50%. My bad. What exactly does the extra 50% get you?

1) Point out in the thread where I spread BS about "stopping power crap" and/or stop making $hit up. I've been around long enough to know and read enough to know that no common handgun round is more effective than another one.
2) You brought up the price issue in post #40.
3) You said .40 costs $20.
4) I replied that I don't pay that much when I buy .40.
5) You having a larger-than-average hand and wishing for a larger Glock grip is not weird.
6) I have large hands and use a Hogue rubber grip on all my Glocks (full, compact, sub-compact) to make the grips larger and more comfortable in my hand for me.
7) This one is easy. $11 for 9mm vs paying $14 for .40 is not 50%. What the 21% difference does get me is a cartridge that I am very comfortable with shooting and carrying for SD. However, at times, I also use a .45, and occasionally, 10mm. The only shooting that I do with a 9mm is for steel plates and for students, unless they ask to shoot another caliber.
8) Yes, most everyone knows that the 9mm is the most popular cartridge in the world, and the increased technology over the past decade or so has made them more effective. However, if that same technology is used in other caliber rounds, common sense dictates that those rounds should perform better than their older counterparts too.
 
Looks like it's headed that way.

I never really cared for the cartridge and have never owned anything chambered in it. I just could never see what it could do that I couldn't already do with one of my 9mms or 45ACPs.

It appears that dealers do not want to even take then in trade anymore.

"Retailers tell me that they’re no longer taking-in 40S&W Caliber pistols, even in trade. They can’t sell them! Nor can they sell pistols in 357SIG and 45GAP caliber. Demand for those calibers is currently zero!"

Nice to know that the .32 H&R Magnum and .327 Federal remain popular hot sellers.
 
1) Point out in the thread where I spread BS about "stopping power crap" and/or stop making $hit up.
You posted velocity and energy charts for some reason.


I've been around long enough to know and read enough to know that no common handgun round is more effective than another one.
That's simply not true. Between 9mm and .40 it might not matter but between .32 and .44mag it sure does. In either case it doesn't explain why you're more comfortable with .40 and use 9mm "only for steel".


2) You brought up the price issue in post #40.
3) You said .40 costs $20.
4) I replied that I don't pay that much when I buy .40.
7) This one is easy. $11 for 9mm vs paying $14 for .40 is not 50%.
All I did was Google some prices. I've already said that I don't buy .40


5) You having a larger-than-average hand and wishing for a larger Glock grip is not weird.
6) I have large hands and use a Hogue rubber grip on all my Glocks (full, compact, sub-compact) to make the grips larger and more comfortable in my hand for me.
I was replying to bigblue.


8) Yes, most everyone knows that the 9mm is the most popular cartridge in the world, and the increased technology over the past decade or so has made them more effective. However, if that same technology is used in other caliber rounds, common sense dictates that those rounds should perform better than their older counterparts too.
So does .40 "perform better" than 9mm or not?
 
.40 is great for competition, you can load it down to feel like a soft 9mm or load it up enough to meet major power factor and still be less than factory rounds. I prefer to reload it over the 9 also. There are even 200 or 220 gr bullets available for it so it can come close to the push felt recoil of a 45 if that is what you want.
 
Why fortay, because every time retards go into panic mode(because they don't stack deep in good times) they go out and buy as much 9mm they can get their paranoid little mitts on the LGS starts limits. Meanwhile I've only run into one LGS that limited everything, otherwise I've always been able to purchase as much .40 as I want. Kind of the same reason I went with 7.62/.308 over 5.55/.223, I've walked out of a LGS with two or three Privi battle packs for ~.73¢(on average IIRC) a round depending where I get it while the other guys are driving around all day hitting limits.

I'd rather spend a bit more money for the availability and more time at the range than driving around wasting gas in search of ammo, but that's just me.
 
More recoil than a 45 and less stopping power (at least in the Glockenspiels), i[wink]

I disagree. I shoot both all the time and shooting 165 grn 40 through a Sig 229 and 230 grn 45 through a Sig 220 there is no discernible difference in recoil.

9mm is for women, 45 for old men with arthritis

LOL

Thats good shooting, what was that, 5 feet? [smile]

I will second that. Damn that Cloverleaf guy can shoot. [grin]
 
ARSENAL! ARSENAL! [smile]

"Montana Starter Set."

In the Squadron Operation's Center we had a book about wounds from the Army Medical Corps, with many pictures of small arms wounds from WWII.

After seeing what 9mm did to our soldiers, I never had any worries about 9mmP.

The worst thing about the .40 was that it killed the 10mm.
 
Last edited:
9mm is for women, 45 for old men with arthritis
Lol. I'm not sure I'd go that far, but I can attest to the fact that my wife likes shooting 9mm out of my M&P compact way more than she likes shooting 40.

I like the snap of 40. I think it makes the shooting more fun. Since I'm a keyboard commando on here, and a desk jockey at work, I don't really care too much about the "effectiveness" of 9 vs 40. If I were an operator who operated operationally 24/7/365, I'm sure I'd have a 10mm/460 Rowland/etc and be able to punch out the bullseye with a 2 second mag dump at 100 yards, but I'm not.
 
You posted velocity and energy charts for some reason.

That's simply not true. Between 9mm and .40 it might not matter but between .32 and .44mag it sure does. In either case it doesn't explain why you're more comfortable with .40 and use 9mm "only for steel".

All I did was Google some prices. I've already said that I don't buy .40

I was replying to bigblue.

So does .40 "perform better" than 9mm or not?

I posted velocity/energy charts to show that there is a difference between the two rounds, and in my example both rounds happen to be traveling at the same MV. Obviously, the heavier round, more mass, traveling at the same velocity as the lighter round is going to have more energy (in this case there is about a 25% difference in mass and MV energy between both of the rounds). Nothing more was stated about terminal ballistics, penetration, recoil, barriers, clothing, performance, etc.

It's not clear why you are now introducing the difference between .32 magnum and .44 magnum, as most gun people know that there is a major difference. In addition, I used the term "most common handgun rounds" that the majority of CCW people would understand as the most common SD round, such as 9mm, .40, and .45. Therefore, I would argue that .32 and .44 are not "common" handgun rounds for SD. Can they be used as SD rounds? Absolutely.

Not that I need to give a reason, but I am comfortable with the .40 because I have been shooting it for 24 years (since 1992). I honestly don't feel that much of a difference between shooting my G19 or G23. In my G27, yes it is a little snappy, but I would venture to guess that someone using a G26 with a +P or +P+ 9mm SD round would expect a similar experience with recoil from the G26, if not slightly more. Again, not that I need to give a reason, but I shoot 9mm at steel because I do shoot a lot of rounds and it is cheaper than using .40.

Big deal, you don't buy .40. Who cares? Furthermore, did you really need to Google the prices to find out that .40 costs more than 9mm?

With regard to the grip size of a Glock, you did state that to Bigblue. However, are you implying that I didn't have a right to comment about the grip size of a Glock? Pardon me for thinking that this was a gun forum where people were allowed to express their own viewpoints and experiences.

Your comment to me, "So does .40 "perform better" than 9mm or not?"

The simple answer to that is it depends on the circumstances. In some situations, a 9mm will perform better and in other situations a .40 will perform better.
 
I posted velocity/energy charts to show that there is a difference between the two rounds, and in my example both rounds happen to be traveling at the same MV. Obviously, the heavier round, more mass, traveling at the same velocity as the lighter round is going to have more energy (in this case there is about a 25% difference in mass and MV energy between both of the rounds). Nothing more was stated about terminal ballistics, penetration, recoil, barriers, clothing, performance, etc.

It's not clear why you are now introducing the difference between .32 magnum and .44 magnum, as most gun people know that there is a major difference. In addition, I used the term "most common handgun rounds" that the majority of CCW people would understand as the most common SD round, such as 9mm, .40, and .45. Therefore, I would argue that .32 and .44 are not "common" handgun rounds for SD. Can they be used as SD rounds? Absolutely.

Not that I need to give a reason, but I am comfortable with the .40 because I have been shooting it for 24 years (since 1992). I honestly don't feel that much of a difference between shooting my G19 or G23. In my G27, yes it is a little snappy, but I would venture to guess that someone using a G26 with a +P or +P+ 9mm SD round would expect a similar experience with recoil from the G26, if not slightly more. Again, not that I need to give a reason, but I shoot 9mm at steel because I do shoot a lot of rounds and it is cheaper than using .40.

Big deal, you don't buy .40. Who cares? Furthermore, did you really need to Google the prices to find out that .40 costs more than 9mm?

With regard to the grip size of a Glock, you did state that to Bigblue. However, are you implying that I didn't have a right to comment about the grip size of a Glock? Pardon me for thinking that this was a gun forum where people were allowed to express their own viewpoints and experiences.

Your comment to me, "So does .40 "perform better" than 9mm or not?"

The simple answer to that is it depends on the circumstances. In some situations, a 9mm will perform better and in other situations a .40 will perform better.


But you aren't arguing.
 
It's not clear why you are now introducing the difference between .32 magnum and .44 magnum, as most gun people know that there is a major difference. In addition, I used the term "most common handgun rounds" that the majority of CCW people would understand as the most common SD round, such as 9mm, .40, and .45. Therefore, I would argue that .32 and .44 are not "common" handgun rounds for SD. Can they be used as SD rounds? Absolutely.
I carry a .454 Casull in a fanny pack. Your fotay don't scare me.
 
Never shot the .40

What am I missing?
If you live in a state with magazine restrictions, you're not really missing anything, as you can get the same gun in .45 and still have 10 rounds. If you live in a free state, then you're missing a round that provides almost as much capacity as 9mm, but with a ton more energy per shot.
 
Back
Top Bottom